Harinder Singh Alias Goldy Virdi v. State Of Ut And ANR









   

 



    



!"

# $%& '

(

  ) 

* ) * + 

,,,,,,  --!"

% + %./.

)    

   








,,,,,,  .$!"

"-.

 #

 0* , )




1  



 
  
 





 







 
!
"
# $



%%%%



1'

,

 &



 
 

'(
(


 
 


)*$
 


 



+* +) $+$& , -
.&/

'(
 





0





# &*

$+$&



 



     
'(


 



 

'



$+1

 

  
2+
(

 




 




(
 
'
 


(

 




$

3


 


 

 $.

 



&4*


#'
5

&**&
,
 
6 6/

 


 

 
.
'(

 


'
7

885

9
5. 
  



" &:




 




 
-
 (

 



 

(
'
'(
 
-
 
(

 




 
'(
 


 
.



 



'

 


'
 
 
 
'




'

'(
 




 


(
(
 

 


 

 


'(


 

 ;
'
#

+&$4&2

" <+++++=.
,"
 

(/
 

-
37
 .>  

 

 
.

 


 
'


" *




 $. 
 
' 
 ;
'
555
37
.?
 
  
 

'7
'
 

7
@(
 A =A 
37


@


 

 $.






&4*

 
#5


 









 


 

 


(


&4*

  











(
 
(


" &)+++++=.
,"
B

(/

'

  ;


" <+++++=.

 

 



-(
 







(

C

 

 


+* +4 $+$&

)

 

 
C





 
 




'
 





( 

+* +) $+$&






' 


$+1

 


 
2+
(

 
 

'
 



:




 


 

 
+* +) $+$&

(





'

 
 


D
 
'
 
 


&)4.


&)*

 
 
 
 

 
(



 '

 
'

 
'
'

'


  



 $

  

(

 



+* +) $+$&

'(
 
 


 


in accordance with the provisions of the Act as well as with the interpretation given by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in various cases. 7.

5
 



 



 


*



 



'
(



&)* 
 



 
C

 

E

       

  

  

           !"  #$%   &&" '           %(   )&&""  !    &&""  &  !

  "" '  !!!    &      !&   '   "

*       ! &'"    '+  "" '     ! !& & '   &&""   ,%) -   !    '+   "" ' &

  .  !              &  .     ! '  '    

   '    '   &&"" %   )&&""  !    "    ! & '   &&""    !&"   !    &    &&"*        &&""  /     ""    !&"  &    &&""   !  " 

    '0   &'"  '   1  20  3 & "    '     "  "    .  !              &  .     ! '  '       '    '   !&"




&)*

 

 
 





.'


 
 
E  
( 

 




&?<4F





'

 
 


&4*

 
 



 
  
7
 






 
'



$+1

 



 
'(
 



5(

'.


,$/


'

 




'.
,&/  
'

 
-(
(

 


 


 

 'C


-

 
4+
(

 
 
-

  
7
 


?+
(




'

'(
 
D6'


 ! ! "

#  $ 

!

!

#   "

% &"  "'
  (

)*+)  ,-) .




'

 









 

#5


 


 ppellate Court to pass an order pending appeal to direct the Appellant-Accused to deposit the sum which shall not be less than 20% of the

 fine or compensation either on an application filed by the original complainant or even 
 


'(
 .




4*?
  



 


 

' 

 
'(
 
D6'
-


! ! "

#  $ 

!

!

#   "

% &"  "'

,-,-
 //
 0- .

 
' 
 


.

( 




 



"

' 

 
 


 

C



.
E
# Now so far as the submission on behalf of the Appellants that even considering the language used in Section 148 of the N.I.

Act as amended, the appellate Court "may" order the Appellant to deposit such sum which shall be a minimum of 20% of the fine or compensation awarded by the trial Court and the word used is not "shall" and therefore the discretion is vested with the first appellate court to direct the Appellant - Accused to deposit such sum and the appellate court has construed it as mandatory, which according to the learned Senior Advocate for the Appellants would be contrary to the provisions of Section 148 of the N.I. Act as amended is concerned, considering the amended Section 148 of the N.I. Act as a whole to be read with the Statement of Objects and Reasons of the amending Section 148 of the N.I. Act, though it is true that in amended Section 148 of the N.I.

Act, the word used is "may", it is generally to be construed as a "rule" or "shall" and not to direct to deposit by the appellate court is an exception for which special reasons are to be assigned. Therefore amended Section 148 of the N.I.

2 application filed by the Appellant-Accused Under Section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to suspend the sentence. The aforesaid is required to be construed considering the fact that as per the amended Section 148 of the N.I. Act, a minimum of 20% of the fine or compensation awarded by the trial court is directed to be deposited and that such amount is to be deposited within a period of 60 days from the date of the order, or within such further period not exceeding 30 days as may be directed by the appellate court for sufficient cause shown by the Appellant. Therefore, if amended Section 148 of the N.I. Act is purposively interpreted in such a manner it would serve the Objects and Reasons of not only amendment in Section 148 of the N.I. Act, but also Section 138 of the N.I. Act.

Negotiable Instruments Act has been amended from time to time so as to provide, inter alia, speedy disposal of cases relating to the offence of the dishonoured of cheques. So as to see that due to delay tactics by the unscrupulous drawers of the dishonoured cheques due to easy filing of the appeals and obtaining stay in the proceedings, an injustice was caused to the payee of a dishonoured cheque who has to spend considerable time and resources in the court proceedings to realise the value of the cheque and having observed that such delay has compromised the sanctity of the cheque transactions, the Parliament has thought it fit to amend Section 148 of the N.I. Act. Therefore, such a purposive interpretation would be in furtherance of the Objects and Reasons of the amendment in Section 148 of the N.I. Act and also Section 138 of the N.I.

Act." +?

5


 
' 



'(
 
D6'
 

! ! "

# 1

, &/
it is well established that this
 



 ppellate Court to pass an order pending appeal to direct the Appellant-Accused to deposit the sum, which shall not be less than 20% of the fine or compensation, either on an application filed by the original complainant or

even on the application filed by the Appellant-Accused under Section 389 of the Cr.P.C. to suspend the sentence, so  


(

 (

 
 
+* +) $+$&

'(
 





0

 







&+

(
 



+* +) $+$&

'(
 




0


 


 
 


  







$%& '

(



14 22  3""

2 4  5 6 4( 3"" 7 6 4(